In view of the gold-domed Capitol of West Virginia at the University of Charleston, Massey Energy CEO Don Blankenship had agreed to debate environmentalist Robert Kennedy, Jr., at the Forum on Energy. But it was really all about coal and mountaintop removal.
Before the debate began I sat there watching them eyeball each other. They avoided all eye contact, only stealing glances when the other wasn't watching.
Bobby said he was nervous, "I was very nervous tonight... for the first time." And Don said he was "concerned." Contrasting himself with his younger, charismatic opponent he said, "I'm basically an introvert from a small town."
Expecting to witness the worst, or at least some shoving, I actually wondered if this was something I should attend while pregnant.
I had a sinking feeling from the beginning. As a West Virginian, I am tired of being embarrassed about all the shenanigans, coming downstairs to an inbox full of questions from my friends in New York.
From the disgrace of mountaintop removal mining and the purchasing of a member of the state Supreme Court -- one of Don's little "contributions" -- to all the jokes on Leno and Men's Health about rotten teeth and incest, few people really understand what a jewel we really are.
On my long list of concerns were these: No one debates against a Kennedy and wins, right? From the beginning, this was Bobby's win-win: New York and Massachusetts don't get into arguments about coal, and West Virginia is the wallflower of the 50 states right now with the Obama administration. There's no blowback for him.
And no one can top a Kennedy on their congenital mastery of public relations. And neither Don nor the coal industry is very good at the age-old art of charm.
I'd been worrying for months that we were going to look bad in more ways than one: What's Don going to wear? Does he have a stylist yet? Is he going to wear all black again? Is he going to hold his wine glass by the stem?
I predicted that Don's temper will flare, his people will act up, and the national (and some international) press will leave West Virginia with no other impression.
In case you don't know, the coal industry in West Virginia is as independent as a hog on ice. The public relations people (usually lawyers) and even the lobbyists are rude and abrupt. Like the hog, they don't need any help or input from anyone, thank you very much. And if it's a reporter they can behave contemptuously with, all the better.
Coal and its adherents are a tight, closed circle and if you aren't a lawmaker they care about, they are all one step short of shoving you down the marble steps of the state capitol. And I knew this before Don's secretary roughed me up when I tried to leave him a message and his lawyers didn't return my calls.
Meanwhile, Kennedy's team couldn't have been nicer or more professional and proactive.
Don -- I'm thinking in my head -- it's better to pass on this debate thing. And sending poor Bobby into the lion's den isn't any good. It's like sending Salman Rushdie to debate the merits of Muslim extremism in Tehran. Rather let's everybody just be nice, lobby the Legislature, and write op-eds in The New York Times!
Frankly, the only way Don wasn't going to make a mess was to control his people and treat the whole thing like a cocktail party on 72nd St. between Madison and 5th.
And to my complete astonishment that's exactly how he played it.
Don might be one black cape short of Snidely Whiplash from the Rocky & Bullwinkle Show, but there is no way on earth a self-made scrapper from coal country who once slept on a dirt floor is going to let a Kennedy stand him down, even if he takes all of us down the chute with him in an embarrassing national imbroglio.
But he didn't.
Don won.
He confounded exceedingly low expectations, and he not only held his own with Bobby, he outclassed him with poise and restraint. He countered Bobby's facts convincingly and the merits of his arguments were largely superior in my mind, and I am on the other side.
While everyone in attendance had a dog in the fight and minds were almost certainly unchanged, it was impossible to see Don as uncredible and illegitimate, pursuing a position based solely on the basis of greed.
That is until you see some of the landscapes he leaves behind.
And he didn't even point in Bobby's face one time!
If you have a hard time believing this, it's not too late to see for yourself and make up your own mind.
Don's numbers were compelling and verifiable, and so were his arguments, and he emphasized that while..."you can find any numbers you are willing to pay for..." that he really did his statistical homework. It showed. One example: Windfarms provide 1 percent of American energy needs, he said. How many windmills, he asked, do you need to replace coal, which powers 50 percent of the country?
Bobby, clearly the more passionate and charismatic, appeared to have memorized passages of Coal River by Michael Shnayerson and he was aided by environmental lawyer Joe Lovett of Lewisburg, WV. And while his arguments were more centered on the illegality of mountaintop removal and its toll on the health and welfare of the communities in which it's practiced, he acknowledged that mining in some form will need to continue.
I think no one's calling the debate, because no one wants to say that Bobby lost it.
To all my fellow greenies, I have another bit of bad news. The tax base of West Virginia will collapse without coal. There is no leadership for an ordered transition into a post-coal economy either.
This is not my opinion, this is the math and the reality on the ground here. Coal represents 75 percent of state revenues, and nothing else is on the horizon that can replace it in this country for the next 25 years.
If Don and his friends continue to conduct themselves with such spit and polish, we're going to lose the battle on mountaintop removal, because how they act in public is certainly their biggest strategic black eye until you've seen the tragic mess for yourself.
Can anyone convince the coal industry that the right thing to do here is to stop the practice of mountaintop removal, somehow and soon? Of course India, China and Australia will place no such constraints on themselves or their economies -- "pollution prosperity" as Bobby called it.
I say there's still hope and I will join UC president and debate moderator Ed Welch in being optimistic that there's no reason both men can't be a part of the solution.
Jesting aside, I do beg your pardon, and having been a RESEARCH EDITOR for a few national magazines, I was certainly behind the eight ball as my own fact checker in this case. What I was not wrong about is that nothing can replace coal in the next 25 years, and also that a moratorium on coal mining as presently practiced will be a body blow for the state of West Virginia. I was also not wrong in my assessment that Don Blankenship won the debate on the merits of his style and substance. Meanwhile, cheers to my buddies over at The Charleston Gazette blog Coal Tattoo who were quick to point my error out to me. I am sadly late in my correction, so mea culpa on that also.
If you are following the finer points of all things coal, Ken Ward's blog Coal Tattoo is for you. Many thanks. And please guys, hurry up and tell me if I screwed this correction up as well. And thanks Mountain Butterly. Tracy Edmonds Herz
That being said, what is the answer? The answer is there is NO one single answer for every situation. The arrogance of involved parties has to be checked. Situations such as the Mining Permit requested within a few hundred yards of Kanawha State Forest, wannabe hippies staging sit-ins and tree sitting BOTH alienate the non-aligned public.
One answer is constructive post-mining land use that benefits the state / people at the same time. One project in Quincy, WV aims to build affordable single family homes postmining. Others have built business parks, golf courses, & schools as post mine land use projects.
Another is to ensure that protected public treasures (Kanawha State Forest) have a reasonable buffer zone to protect them. Regardless of the side one is on, more realistic answers need to come forth. The issue is not black and white - it is how do we use this effort to the state's / citizens best advantage.
No construction project is pretty while it is ongoing. The same is true of mountaintop removal mining. It takes vision, dedication and investment to see that the numerous man and machine hours are not wasted.
Now, assuming that 1) the 75% applies to the combination of those two taxes, and 2) that coal mining companies and utilities provide as high as 75% of total business taxes, coal’s share of total business taxes provides 8.7% of general revenue funds. Adding that to the contribution from severance taxes, coal’s total share of state tax revenues amounts to just under 20%, and that is for a good year (severance taxes in previous years were around the $300-370 million range).
Other taxes do apply, such as the personal income tax, but since coal employment amounts to only about 5% of the state labor force, it is not expected that coal contributes a significant portion of personal income taxes.
If you do happen to have a source available that backs up the claim of 75%, I would appreciate seeing that as well. The true number, however, in my understanding, is less than 20%.
The point is, even if coal accounts for up to 20% of state tax revenues, that number is likely to fall substantially over the next decade, and–for the purpose of preserving tax revenues and jobs–the state should begin developing alternative economic opportunities to fill the coming gap.
To read more about coal in Central Appalachia, please visit www.downstreamstrategies.com and look at our recent publication, "The Decline of Central Appalachian Coal and the Need for Economic Diversification."
I’d also be interested to know how you came up with the “75% of state coal taxes†number. My own research and information from the WV Department of Revenue indicates that is inaccurate.
I’ve often heard similar numbers being thrown around, mostly by WV legislators from coalfield counties. However, the number is usually around 67%. What that actually refers to is business taxes. The point is, it does not represent what your assertion suggests, that 75% of state tax revenues come from coal. Here’s why.
The coal severance tax, by far the greatest chunk of taxes coming from coal, amounted to $412 million in 2008 (data provided by WV Dept of Revenue). Severance taxes are part of the General Revenue Fund. In FY 2009, the total general revenue (taxes) amounted to $3.9 billion. That means that coal severance taxes–in perhaps their best year ever due to record coal prices–amounted to 10.5% of total state tax revenues.
As far as business taxes go, there are two types of business taxes in WV: the Business and Occupation tax–which is a tax on electric generating utilities–and the Corporate Income/Business Franchise tax, which I believe applies to all companies.
In FY 2009, these two taxes amounted to about 11.5% of total general revenue: http://www.wvbudget.gov/revenues/RGRjun09.pdf
Don also contradicted himself, especially in relation to renewable energy, stating that if renewables were viable and profitable, they would be developed. He later stated that "wind and solar are cutting into our market." If renewables weren't profitable, why would they be cutting into the coal market? Don also failed to mention that there are already 330 megawatts (MW) of wind developed and online in West Virginia.
To pre-empt any response about how wind and solar are being subsidized, consider this:
“Fossil fuel subsidies amount to roughly $72 billion between 2002 and 2008. $54 billion...in the form of 23 different tax credits for oil, coal and natural gas producers...$18.3 billion was grants and other direct cash for R&D. Renewables received nearly $29 billion in all, much of it also in the form of tax credits...and more than half of the renewable subsidy—$16.8 billion—went to the production of ethanol from corn.â€
http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=how-much-in-subsidies-do-fossil-fue-2009-09-18
But, sadly, at the end of the day, Don will always win regardless of any debate, regardless of how crazy he acts or is able NOT to act, and regardless of how many facts stack up for or against his argument. In a state that has always struggled just to survive and in an economy where everyone is struggling, none of that really matters because mining means jobs. Jobs that pay well (oftentimes much more than a college graduate can ever earn). Jobs that people can live off of and support their families with. Jobs that carry a sort of dignity because it is so tied to our history and culture.
It is a deal with the devil, yes. But who else provides that in WV? Who else is even trying?
Until WV is able to find some other way to provide good paying jobs that people can live off of, Don and everyone else in control of the mining industry will win every debate. They will continue to win until the last chunk of coal is wretched from the land and the mountain state becomes a state of ruin and rubble.
If an alien comes and sits in front of my television here what they'll come to conclude is #1. that coal does everything for us, it feeds us,it houses us, and wipes our bottoms clean. and #2. there is a strange absence of African Americans. If our alien watches further they'll see that there is nothing in either camp (pro mining, or anti minig...) that shows that any type of solutions to anything that ails us.
Lastly, I'd like to say to both camps (Blankenship, and Kennedy), the fool finds dreams the cheapest road to glory, but the wise man knows the high price of awakening. Also, a falsehood may get a head start, but the truth will soon follow and catch up.
Thank you for your time.
Lovingly,Charlie Tee
Yes, coal is a necessary evil, it does employ, but it does in no way shape or form build minds, or at least the kind of mind needed to produce a viable substitute.
CONTINUED NEXT POST
What do I mean by this: I mean that mountaintop removal,is terrible, and I agree with you whole heartedly, people from the rest of the country need to visit here and take the tour for themselves. They need to see how the place used to look, the majesty of these mountains, the lush of its greenery, the way people from this state absolutely are devoted to it.
CONTINUED NEXT POST
CONTINUED NEXT POST
I am a transplanted native of New York city, and in the 70' s I moved to the Charleston area to attend college. Having graduated and moving back home, I worked for many years in the Bronx, only to find myself more and more desirous to return to West Virginia, and it's people.
While I didn't attend the so called debate ( which I more contend was a debacle...), I did see the highlights on the various late news programs.
CONTINUED NEXT POST...
Ms. Herz doesn't seem to listen to what the priorities of the "enviros" are. First and most important cease mountaintop removal mining, cease destroying mountains, streams, and lives. The coal mines liked Daddy knew are still there and will continue to produce, but the new breed of mountain movers who call themselves miners need to read the writing on the wall. One of these days coal will be replaced, but for now we will be satisfied with saving what is left of our mountains.
Being from SouthEast Ky, we face similar threats from Big Coal...
We need the coal/jobs, but NOT at the detriment/destruction of our beloved mountains...
MTR, the extraction method, is the PROBLEM, not just coal itself.
..
it is foolish to NOT LOOK FORWARD to RENEWABLE RESOURCES.
HEMP,,,, HEMP,,, HEMP,,,
H-E-M-P, planted on all those murdered mountains, would provide JOBS, RENEWABLE RESOURCE-- (3 harvests per year & NO PESTICIDES!), FOOD, MEDICINE, FUEL, FABRIC, etc....
but,
COMMONSENSE N-O-T COMMON IN COMMONWEALTH....